VeriSign Seeks Greater Power To Help Law Enforcement Around The Globe Censor Websites They Don't Like

from the this-is-a-problem dept

We've discussed in the past how VeriSign helped make it easy for ICE to seize domain names that use the .com and .net domain names. And now it looks like the company would like to expand those censorship-helping powers to seize domain names of websites at the request of law enforcement around the globe, even without a trial or any sort of due process. The company claims it gets lots of requests from non-US law enforcement for such things. Of course, the proper response is that VeriSign should tell them to pound sand. Instead it's seeking broad powers to help governments censor websites. Scary stuff. Even worse, the company seems to be burying this request in a larger request to be able to take down "malicious" sites, such as those that are spewing malware. That makes it more likely that these powers will be granted. Once again, a reminder that when you have a few private intermediaries who act as gatekeepers, it only serves to enable censorship. Seems like it's time to route around such central gatekeepers.

Re: Re: Re: Re: _sigh_

Re: Re: Re: _sigh_

Not trying to be difficult, but how do you convince enough people to complain about Verisign to sites? I can't imagine enough people care enough to bother complaining about Verisign much less threaten to stop using their favorite site over it.

*whips out a crystal ball*
Ah hello Verisign... you've come to see your future haven't you.... please sit down...
ommmmm
I see many, masked people visiting you soon.
They will bring into the light all of your misdeeds.
All because you sold out peoples rights.
I see your servers bursting into flames, and your certs ending up revoked.

It might not be the 5th of November... but I bet they might make an exception for you.

Re:

Yeah. Best to stay in the house with the kidnapper who routinely bends me over and probes my tailpipe, because you never know what might happen if I try to escape to the house next door to call for help.

Re:

Let's hope "ICANN's board of directors" decides correctly!

"a Registry Services Evaluation Process (RSEP) document filed today with ICANN. The RSEP is currently the primary mechanism that registries employ when they want to make significant changes to their contracts with ICANN.
...
But ICANN's board of directors would have the make the ultimate decision whether to approve the anti-abuse policy and the malware-scanning service."

Real story here is that we're now subject to ICANN! Yet another unaccountable /international/ corporation. So tell me, Mike, how do you propose to get rid of ICANN? You CAN'T just "route around" it, silly.

It seems to me the purpose of this move is to legitimize the recent practice of taking down websites based on nothing more than US government claims of infringement. As such, I suspect the Obama administration is ultimately the one behind this proposal. This claim is supported not only by recent domain seizures but also by numerous other examples of the Obama administration bending over backwards to satisfy the whims of its entertainment industry contributors.

The government's reasoning must be that as long as it's a private organization taking down websites it will not itself be held responsible for improper takedowns, nor will it have to justify such takedowns to any judge. As such, this constitutes the greatest threat to freedom the Internet has ever faced.

Re:

This claim is supported not only by recent domain seizures but also by numerous other examples of the Obama administration bending over backwards to satisfy the whims of its entertainment industry contributors.

For the sake of accuracy, here are the top ten contributors to Obama through the last election cycle. (through PAC's, employees, officers and immediate families). Note that tech giants Google and Microsoft are #4 and 5. Only Time Warner is in the top ten and its business interests are far broader than just Warner Bros. (ie TW Cable, etc) Grouped by industry, Computer/Internet gave slightly more than Motion Picture/TV/Music. So in anticipation of the usual cries that decisions are unduly influenced by a larger contributor, I point this out. (all from Opensecrets.org). Note also that higher education are the biggest contributors who generally are more aligned with the computer/internet industry.

Re: Re:

Re: Re:

Funny how your list excludes the approximately 1.3 million dollars David Geffen raised for him? How many other such contributions have you excluded? Also, how do you explain Obama's appointments of numerous people friendly to the entertainment industry and hostile to opposing interests?

Re:

Taking down websites based on complaints from law enforcement is very much a matter of censoring websites law enforcers don't like. It's not as it they have to prove any of those websites are breaking the law. Under Verizon's proposal, their complaints are enough.

It's no surprise that some people do not like the ease of modern day communication amongst the peons and would like to put a stop it. Apparently they realize this would cause much uproar and are attempting the slow and gradual removal of the internet as a communications platform. In its place will be a shiny new and hopelessly useless POS media distribution system much like television.